[Osmf-talk] my views on the ODbL
um at ulfm.de
Thu Dec 3 21:25:32 UTC 2009
Mike Collinson schrieb:
> Discussion has picked up again on this list so each License Working
Group member will respond individually with their own personal views.
My view is that the ODbL is a good license, but I do have reservations
about the license change process.
CC-BY-SA doesn't really work for geodata, and it's not clear what its
attribution clause means for mass collaboration projects like ours. Plus
there is a disturbing new trend of individual mappers sending nasty
letters to suspected license violators.
We would not have those problems with the ODbL (nor, in fact, with PD).
The LWG, the foundation's lawyer and members of the legal-talk list have
put a lot of effort into making sure that the license works. There also
are reviews by several independent lawyers. For that reason I don't see
its complexity as a problem.
However, one important limitation of the ODbL is that we cannot accept
CC-licensed data, nor ODbL-licensed data, from other projects. That also
means there will be no two-way exchange with Wikipedia's Geo project.
My main concern is that a license change can be a big risk for a
project. If we change the license, we will have to expect to loose a
significant amount of data. In the past, some open projects have even
been forked due to license change attemps (XFree86 being a notable
example). For that reason I don't think it is good for the Foundation to
decide on a new license and require the larger community to simply
accept that decision.
I think we should give the mappers a real choice.
More information about the osmf-talk